My View: Loss of lawsuit shows urgency of reforming 'scaffold law'

Well, it's happened. Ten months after I wrote in this newspaper about how the Tappan Zee Bridge project will cost millions more because of the obsolete "scaffold law," the state lost a scaffold law lawsuit that would likely not have been valid in any other state.

Comment

By Thomas B. Stebbins

recordonline.com

By Thomas B. Stebbins

Posted Feb. 2, 2013 at 2:00 AM

By Thomas B. Stebbins
Posted Feb. 2, 2013 at 2:00 AM

» Social News

Well, it's happened. Ten months after I wrote in this newspaper about how the Tappan Zee Bridge project will cost millions more because of the obsolete "scaffold law," the state lost a scaffold law lawsuit that would likely not have been valid in any other state.

In the case, Kin vs. State of New York, the plaintiff needed to climb a ladder to access a scaffold suspended under a bridge. On the day of her injury, Kin chose to use the top half of an extension ladder, rather than the appropriate bottom half with rubber feet to keep it stable. The extension ladder slipped, and she fell and was injured.

She testified that she had access to the bottom half, but chose to use the half without safety footings because it was easier to get to. Now you and I will pay for her choice to use improper equipment.

In any other state, Kin's negligence would have a significant bearing on the outcome of the case. But in New York, the scaffold law assigns total liability to the defendants, even though she was arguably primarily responsible for her fall.

Judge Robert Smith put it best in a 2012 Court of Appeals case, Dahar vs. Holland Ladder: "... as we have long held, (the Scaffold Law) imposes liability even on contractors and owners who had nothing to do with the plaintiff's accident; and where a violation of the statute has caused injury, any fault by the plaintiff contributing to that injury is irrelevant."

New York needs to reform this outdated and widely exploited law. It may have made sense in the 1880s when the law was created, but since then every other state has realized that absolute liability utterly fails to protect workers.

Indeed, when Illinois repealed its version of the Scaffold Law in 1995, construction fatalities decreased dramatically, even as the number of construction jobs increased. Once employers were relieved of the burden of the scaffold law, they were able to hire more workers, rather than spending money on lawsuits and insurance.

Reforming the law to apportion liability based on actual fault is a no-brainer. Gov. Cuomo and the Legislature could achieve an incredible three-part success: save taxpayer money, strengthen our economy, and create jobs. But as long as the law remains in its current form, New York taxpayers will continue to waste hundreds of millions of dollars on unnecessary lawsuits.

Thomas B. Stebbins is executive director of the Lawsuit Reform Alliance of New York.